European Journal of Work and Organizational

0 downloads 0 Views 433KB Size Report
Dec 12, 2007 - Organizational justice and extrarole customer service: The mediating role of ...... employees. Although there are other predictors of well-being at work .... Areas of worklife: A structured approach to organizational predictors of ...
This article was downloaded by:[Universidad de Valencia] On: 17 July 2008 Access Details: [subscription number 779262401] Publisher: Psychology Press Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713684945

Organizational justice and extrarole customer service: The mediating role of well-being at work Carolina Moliner a; Vicente Martínez-Tur b; José Ramos b; José M. Peiró c; Russell Cropanzano d a Department of Health Psychology, Universidad Miguel Hern ndez, Spain b Department of Social Psychology, Universidad de Valencia, Spain c Department of Social Psychology, Universidad de Valencia and IVIE, Spain d

Department of Management and Policy, University of Arizona, USA

First Published: September 2008 To cite this Article: Moliner, Carolina, Martínez-Tur, Vicente, Ramos, José, Peiró, José M. and Cropanzano, Russell (2008) 'Organizational justice and extrarole customer service: The mediating role of well-being at work', European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 17:3, 327 — 348 To link to this article: DOI: 10.1080/13594320701743616 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13594320701743616

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article maybe used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF WORK AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 2008, 17 (3), 327 – 348

Organizational justice and extrarole customer service: The mediating role of well-being at work Carolina Moliner Department of Health Psychology, Universidad Miguel Herna´ndez, Spain

Vicente Martı´ nez-Tur and Jose´ Ramos Department of Social Psychology, Universidad de Valencia, Spain

Jose´ M. Peiro´ Department of Social Psychology, Universidad de Valencia and IVIE, Spain

Russell Cropanzano Department of Management and Policy, University of Arizona, USA

The purpose of this article is to propose and test a model of extrarole customer service (ERCS). We propose that organizational justice (distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational) promotes well-being at work (low burnout and high engagement). Well-being at work, in turn, engenders more effective ERCS. Thus, well-being at work is considered a mediator of the relationships from organizational justice to ERCS. This fully mediated model was compared to an alternative fully direct model. The sample consisted of 317 contact employees who were working in the Spanish service sector. The results of structural equation modelling supported the importance of the mediating role of the positive side of well-being at work (engagement) in the relationship between organizational justice and ERCS. The article concludes with a discussion of the theoretical and managerial implications. Keywords: Burnout; Engagement; Extrarole customer service; OCB; Organizational justice. Correspondence should be addressed to Jose´ M. Peiro´, Departamento de Psicologı´ a Social, Facultad de Psicologı´ a, Av. Blasco Iban˜ez, 21, 46010 Valencia, Spain. E-mail: [email protected] The authors are grateful for the financial support of the Spanish Agency of Science and Technology (BSO2002-04483-C03-01) and the Spanish Agency of Education and Science (SEJ2005-05375 within the CONSOLIDER Project SEJ2006-14086). This research was also sponsored by the Generalidad Valenciana, Spain (I þ D þ I groups, 03/195). Ó 2007 Psychology Press, an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa business http://www.psypress.com/ejwop

DOI: 10.1080/13594320701743616

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

328

MOLINER ET AL.

Service work is characterized by a need for effective contact between providers and consumers in order to increase customer satisfaction. These service provider – customer relationships become highly important, offering a means by which a firm can achieve excellent service quality. The heterogeneity and uncertainty associated with service delivery hinders the possibility of prescribing and anticipating adequate employee behaviours in faceto-face interactions with customers (contact employees), with the voluntary actions of these employees being especially important. Accordingly, the concept of extrarole customer service (ERCS)—or customer-focused organizational citizenship behaviours (OCBs; Schneider et al., 2005)— conceptualized as ‘‘discretionary behaviours of contact employees in serving customers that extend beyond formal role requirements’’ (Bettencourt & Brown, 1997, p. 41), has emerged as a critical factor in providing the flexibility that service organizations need (Skarlicki & Latham, 1996). Considerable research has been devoted to understanding the management of service employees. While important contributions have been made (e.g., Schneider & Bowen, 1992), there is a good deal that we still do not understand. One challenge facing scholars is to combine the existing theories into more complex frameworks. For instance, scholars have observed that organizational justice promotes helping behaviours (e.g., Masterson, Lewis, Goldman, & Taylor, 2000) and is related to customer satisfaction (e.g., Clemmer, 1993). Other researchers have documented that low levels of wellbeing at work are deleterious to service quality (e.g., Leiter, Harvie, & Frizell, 1998), customer satisfaction (Dormann & Kaiser, 2002), and customer loyalty (Harter, Schmidt, & Keyes, 2003). Given these somewhat independent sets of findings, we propose and test a model of customer service effectiveness. In particular, we combine organizational justice literature with the research on well-being at work to improve the explanation of the ERCS. In injustice situations, burnout increases while engagement decreases, and this may be reflected in voluntary actions the individuals may perform. This article begins with a review of our theoretical position and the development of the hypothesized model. The theoretical framework employed here relates concepts from three different literatures—organizational justice, psychological well-being, and customer service. The subsequent section reviews existing literature (and resulting hypotheses) in three subsections, each corresponding to one of the principal relationships proposed in our model. Next, the empirical study is presented. We conclude with the discussion of the implications.

ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE ! ERCS Organizational justice has been studied for more than four decades. It is a frequently researched topic in industrial and organizational psychology,

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE, WELL-BEING AT WORK, AND ERCS

329

human resources management, and organizational behaviour (CohenCharash & Spector, 2001; Colquitt, Conlon, Wesson, Porter, & Yee, 2001; Cropanzano, Rupp, Mohler, & Schminke, 2001). Initially, the literature focused on distributive justice (Adams, 1965; Leventhal, 1976) or the perceived fairness of received outcomes. Over time, scholars began to focus on procedural justice, or the fairness of formal processes (Leventhal, 1980; Thibaut & Walker, 1975). A third type of justice, called interactional justice, focuses its attention on the importance of interpersonal treatment when procedures are implemented (Bies & Moag, 1986). Interactional justice, in turn, has been conceptualized as being composed of two facets, informational and interpersonal justice. In fact, Colquitt (2001) validated a four-fold justice model with the following dimensions: distributive, procedural, and interactional (composed of informational and interpersonal). Organizational justice is important for explaining many organizational outcome variables (Greenberg, 1990). For our purposes here, it is critical to note that, when workers believe they are unfairly treated, they are less likely to engage in helpful OCBs (e.g., Masterson et al., 2000; Moorman, 1991; Rupp & Cropanzano, 2002). These findings have been further substantiated by meta-analytic research. Though their results varied somewhat from the dimension of OCB under investigation, Cohen-Charash and Spector (2001) found that all three types of justice were related to citizenship behaviours. Likewise, Colquitt et al. (2001) reported that distributive and procedural fairness predicted citizenship behaviours. They also found that different dimensions of interactional justice predicted OCB as well. In a third metaanalysis, Skitka, Winquist, and Hutchinson (2003) found that distributive and procedural justice were each related to citizenship behaviours, although they did not investigate the effects of interactional justice. Performance that goes beyond ‘‘in-role’’ requirements has been defined in at least four ways: OCB, prosocial behaviours, contextual performance, and extrarole behaviours (see Maxham & Netemeyer, 2003; Motowidlo, 2003). There is considerable conceptual overlap, with several behaviours simultaneously included in the four categories (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach, 2000). In the present research, we focus on ERCS as a particularly important type of extrarole behaviour (Bettencourt & Brown, 1997). As Maxham and Netemeyer (2003) pointed out, the customerdirected extrarole behaviours have been ‘‘the least researched, but perhaps the most beneficial to many firms’’ (p. 47). Because OCB is conceptually similar to ERCS, the aforementioned findings relating organizational justice to OCB support our theoretical model: Unfairly treated employees are likely to refuse to give helpful behaviours towards customers (Bettencourt & Brown, 1997; Maxham & Netemeyer, 2003). We expect that distributive, procedural, and interactional justice would predict ERCS, in agreement with previous research studies relating organizational justice to OCB.

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

330

MOLINER ET AL.

However, other research efforts have indicated that this influence is only indirect. For example, the trickle-down model of organizational justice confirmed the mediating role of commitment (Masterson, 2001). One potential mediator is well-being at work.

WELL-BEING AT WORK ! ERCS Historically, the social and behavioural sciences have placed relatively greater emphasis on psychological dysfunction. Accordingly, Myers and Diener (1995) noted that psychological publications focusing on the negative aspects of well-being outnumber their positive counterparts by a ratio of 17 to 1. This idea holds true in the research on service organization work as well, with an exception of job satisfaction. In more recent years, scholars have moved to correct this imbalance and expanded the research interest in the study of optimal human functioning (e.g., Seligman & Csikzentmihalyi, 2000; Wright, 2005). Accordingly, a complete understanding of well-being at work requires both reducing the hedonically negative (e.g., decreasing burnout) and increasing the hedonically positive (e.g., promoting engagement). We consider each next.

Burnout Injustice is considered a critical psychosocial stressor in organizational settings (Elovainio, Kivima¨ki, & Helkama, 2001). Unfair situations can indicate exploitation, lack of control, or social exclusion, thus increasing stress (Judge & Colquitt, 2004) and burnout reactions (Kausto, Elo, Lipponen, & Elovainio, 2005). Burnout is a ‘‘psychological syndrome that involves a prolonged response to stressors in the workplace’’ (Maslach, 2003, p. 189). Burnout has been conceptualized as a three-dimensional construct, composed of exhaustion (feelings of being overextended in one’s physical resources), cynicism (a distant attitude towards the job), and lack of professional efficacy (negative attitudes and feelings of incompetence towards one’s professional role) (Maslach & Jackson, 1981). Whereas some scholars have found support for a three-component model (Maslach & Jackson, 1981, 1986), recent research efforts have supported a twocomponent model (e.g., Green, Walkey, & Taylor, 1991; Schaufeli, Salanova, Gonza´lez-Roma´, & Bakker, 2002), called the ‘‘core of burnout’’, which includes the dimensions of exhaustion and cynicism. Lack of professional efficacy was excluded because it was defined as a personality trait (Gonza´lez-Roma´, Schaufeli, Bakker, & Lloret, 2006; Shirom, 2003). According to Maslach and Schaufeli (1993), burnout decreases effectiveness and work performance. Individuals experiencing burnout are emotionally drained. As a result, they have fewer emotional resources with which to

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE, WELL-BEING AT WORK, AND ERCS

331

reach out to others. As we have seen, burnout also involves cynicism: Cynical workers are less likely to exert effort on behalf of others (cf. Maslach, Schaufeli, & Leiter, 2001). While this (negative) relationship between burnout and job effectiveness seems intuitively likely, only recently has research documented this relationship. For example, a longitudinal study by Wright and Bonett (1997) found that exhaustion predicted job performance. This work is especially encouraging, since their longitudinal design is consistent with our model proposed here. Likewise, Maslach et al. (2001) found that people who experience burnout exhibit lower productivity and effectiveness at work, which in turn leads to decreased organizational commitment and customer aggression responses (Ben-Zur & Yagil, 2005). Other evidence suggests that burnout tends to reduce the performance of OCB. Cropanzano, Rupp, and Byrne (2003) found that exhaustion was negatively related to organizational citizenship behaviour directed towards the organization (OCBO) and the supervisor (OCBS). Unfortunately for our present purposes, Cropanzano and his colleagues did not examine extrarole behaviours directed towards customers. For this reason, the present study will examine the association between burnout and ERCS. Specifically, we hypothesized that burnout would be negatively related to ERCS (Hypothesis 1).

Engagement Engagement is defined as a ‘‘persistent, positive motivational state of fulfillment in employees’’ (Maslach et al., 2001, p. 417). Engagement was initially measured by the opposite pattern of scores on the three dimensions of burnout (Maslach & Leiter, 1997). However, assessing the presence of something is more definite than assessing the absence of its opposite (the absence of burnout is not the same as engagement). Furthermore, it is impossible to study the relationships between burnout and engagement if they are the poles on a continuum. Therefore, current research treats burnout and engagement as two independent dimensions of well-being at work, and not as end points on the same continuum (see Schaufeli, Martı´ nez, Marques-Pinto, Salanova, & Bakker, 2002). The concept of engagement is conceptualized as a three-dimensional construct characterized by: high levels of energy, willingness to invest effort in one’s work, and persistence even during difficulties (vigour, cf. Shirom, 2004); a sense of significance, enthusiasm, inspiration, and challenge (dedication); and high levels of concentration in an employee who has difficulty detaching from work (absorption) (Schaufeli, Martı´ nez, et al., 2002). Schaufeli, Salanova, et al. (2002) developed a self-report questionnaire to assess engagement. They confirmed that the consideration of burnout and engagement as two independent constructs showed a superior fit to the data than the one-factor model that assumes a single general factor of well-being at work. Similar to the concept of a ‘‘core of burnout’’, it is reasonable to argue

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

332

MOLINER ET AL.

for a ‘‘core of engagement’’, composed of the dimensions of vigour and dedication, as the antithetical dimensions to exhaustion and cynicism (Schaufeli, Martı´ nez, et al., 2002). The consideration of burnout and engagement as two independent, yet related, concepts foments a more in-depth understanding of well-being at work and its relations with other variables, testing whether or not the engagement scales yield similar patterns as those for burnout, but with reversed signs. With this in mind, we believe that engaged workers will be more likely to perform ERCS, while their less engaged counterparts will show lower levels of effective customer service. A worker who is engaged is emotionally involved, receptive to the social environment, and more willing to exert effort to facilitate customers’ needs. A less engaged worker is emotionally withdrawn and less willing to exert effort. Although these ideas follow from the work by Schaufeli and his colleagues (Schaufeli, Martı´ nez, et al., 2002; Schaufeli, Salanova, et al., 2002), most research on well-being has emphasized negative responses to the work environment, such as burnout. There has been less research on psychological engagement and workplace behaviour. Although there are previous research efforts linking job satisfaction to OCB (e.g., Ang, van Dyne, & Begley, 2003), no study has examined the predictive value of burnout and engagement with regard to the performance of ERCS. In order to address this research need, we hypothesize that engagement will be positively related to ERCS (Hypothesis 2).

ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE ! WELL-BEING AT WORK Well-being at work, in turn, is sensitive to organizational justice (Maslach et al., 2001). Justice perceptions have been found to be positively and negatively associated with psychological well-being and psychological distress, respectively (Cropanzano, Goldman, & Benson, 2005; Judge & Colquitt, 2004; Kausto et al., 2005). The reasons for this relationship become clearer when one takes a closer look at the consequences of injustice. As has been discussed elsewhere, injustice has three especially pernicious effects (for reviews, see Cropanzano et al., 2001). First, injustice often makes it more difficult for one to obtain valued economic goals at work. If performance criteria are unfairly applied, for example, then it is difficult to know whether one’s efforts on behalf of customers will be rewarded. Second, unfair treatment jeopardizes one’s standing in important workplace relationships. If one is treated unjustly, this treatment sends a signal that one is not valued by the group. Third, injustice involves the violation of important social norms. It is unpleasant for people to observe assaults on closely held values. In short, justice can harm well-being by assailing as many as three motives—instrumental, relational, and moral.

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE, WELL-BEING AT WORK, AND ERCS

333

Burnout Generally speaking, research suggests that injustice increases burnout. Research on professional caregivers has found that when these individuals perceive that they are giving substantially more than they receive in return, they are more likely to experience burnout (e.g., van Dierendonck, Schaufeli, & Sixma, 1994). Similar relationships between inequity and burnout have also been observed among police officers (Kop, Euwema, & Schaufeli, 1999) and teachers (van Horn, Schaufeli, & Enzmann, 1999). Finally, Brotheridge (2003) observed that distributive justice and procedural justice predict exhaustion, the main dimension of burnout.

Engagement Little is known about the potential impact of organizational justice on employee engagement. It seems reasonable to suppose that when individuals are treated fairly they will feel better about their jobs. Indeed, some research has found that justice predicts related constructs, such as increased satisfaction or reduced turnover intentions (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001; Colquitt et al., 2001). Therefore, we investigated the relationship between organizational justice and engagement in an exploratory mode and anticipated that procedural and interactional justice would decrease burnout and increase engagement.

Summary of hypotheses involving procedural and interactional justice Taking into account all these arguments, as well as previous research, it is hypothesized that procedural justice will have a negative relationship with burnout (Hypothesis 3) and a positive relationship with engagement (Hypothesis 4). Similar effects are predicted for interactional justice. Specifically, interactional justice will show the same negative relationship with burnout (Hypothesis 5) and a positive relationship with engagement (Hypothesis 6). We deal with distributive justice in the next section.

RELATIONSHIPS AMONG THE DIMENSIONS OF JUSTICE: RECONSIDERING THE ROLE OF DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE A close examination of the distributive justice literature suggests that fair outcome allocations can increase citizenship behaviours and job performance (e.g., Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001; Colquitt et al., 2001), while

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

334

MOLINER ET AL.

unfair allocations may engender negative affect (Skitka et al., 2003) and stress (Cropanzano et al., 2005). In this regard, distributive justice appears to function much like interactional and procedural fairness. But there are also important differences. For example, in a recent study of 174 faculty members, Judge and Colquitt (2004) found that procedural and interactional justice were more strongly related to stress than was distributive justice. The meta-analytic work of Skitka and her colleagues (2003) provides an intriguing explanation as to why this might be so. Skitka et al. examined several studies that manipulated both distributive and procedural fairness. They found that distributive justice had a strong causal effect on procedural, while procedural had a weaker causal effect on distributive. As a result of these findings, Skitka and her co-authors suggest that distributive justice, in many situations, could precede procedural justice. That is, one could infer the fairness of a process from the fairness of the outcomes. To our knowledge, this possibility has not been directly tested in research on workplace well-being. In addition, we believe that Skitka et al.’s (2003) logic extends to interactional justice, although this has not been tested. Therefore, we predict that the effect of distributive justice on burnout and engagement will be mediated by the other two types of justice. In other words, we expect that distributive justice will have an indirect effect on well-being at work through its impact on procedural (Hypothesis 7) and interactional (Hypothesis 8) justice. Of course, this is not to say that procedural and interactional justice are entirely caused by distributive justice, only that outcome fairness is one consideration.

FULLY MEDIATED VERSUS FULLY DIRECT MODELS As we discussed earlier, we propose that organizational justice impacts ERCS by improving well-being at work. This is our fully mediated model. However, the research reviewed thus far lends itself to alternatives. Given that our understanding of organizational justice has proceeded somewhat independently from our understanding of well-being at work, it may be that workplace fairness and well-being have independent effects. That is, both organizational justice and burnout/engagement are important, but they are not related to each other. This is a fully direct model. Specifically, in this model each type of justice might exert a direct effect on ERCS. We test those direct effects by comparing our fully mediated model to the alternative fully direct model. To test which of the two hypothesized models would receive support, an empirical study was conducted in real-life organizational settings.

ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE, WELL-BEING AT WORK, AND ERCS

335

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

METHOD Participants A total of 59 hotels located in Spain participated in this study. The initial contact with service organizations was made by the researchers, who made an appointment with the manager to request permission to interview a group of employees. In order to be eligible, employees had to have contact regularly with customers as part of their daily work. To reduce evaluation apprehension, social desirability bias, leniency, and acquiescence, we guaranteed respondents complete anonymity. Furthermore, we also made an effort to reassure participants that there were no right or wrong answers and that they should answer questions as honestly as possible (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003). For this reason, contact employees voluntarily and anonymously completed a questionnaire, through a direct contact procedure, on variables used in this study, during company time. A total of 349 contact employees were surveyed. Final usable responses were obtained from 317 contact employees, with a response rate of 90.8%. Their average age was 33.6 years (SD ¼ 10.3). About 51.7% of the contact employees were men. Position tenure ranged from a few months to 35 years, with an average of about 7 years.

Measures Organizational justice. The measurement of organizational justice perception was based on the concepts of distributive, procedural and interactional justice (e.g., Moorman, 1991; Schminke et al., 2000). Distributive justice was measured by using four items. A sample item was: ‘‘The rewards I receive here are fair’’. Three items measuring procedural justice assessed the structural aspects of the procedures used in the organization (e.g., ‘‘The procedures for setting my work schedule and tasks are fair’’). Finally, we measured interactional justice with four items, two for interpersonal justice (e.g., ‘‘My supervisor treats me with respect and dignity’’) and two for informational justice (e.g., ‘‘My supervisor offers adequate justification for decisions made about my job’’). With these items, we assessed the quality of the interpersonal treatment received from the supervisor (interpersonal) and the willingness of supervisors to discuss the questions posed by the subordinates and provide an adequate explanation of decision-making procedures (informational). Interpersonal and informational justices were considered as two indicators of interactional justice. All organizational justice items were scored on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (‘‘completely disagree’’) to 7 (‘‘completely agree’’). Higher scores indicated greater distributive, procedural, and interactional justice.

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

336

MOLINER ET AL.

Burnout. To measure burnout, we used the validated Spanish version (Schaufeli, Salanova, et al., 2002) of the Maslach-Burnout Inventory – General Survey (MBI-GS; Schaufeli, Leiter, Maslach, & Jackson, 1996). In this study, we concentrated on the first two dimensions of burnout (exhaustion and cynicism) as indicators of burnout. These two dimensions have been considered the ‘‘core of burnout’’ (Green et al., 1991). The instrument consists of 9 items in two dimensions: exhaustion (5 items, e.g., ‘‘I feel burned out by my work’’) and cynicism (4 items, e.g., ‘‘I have become more cynical about whether my work contributes anything’’). High scores on exhaustion and cynicism were indicative of burnout. Engagement. Engagement was assessed with the Spanish version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES; Schaufeli, Salanova, et al., 2002). Two dimensions considered as the ‘‘core of engagement’’ were assessed in this study: vigour (6 items, e.g., ‘‘I feel strong and vigorous in my job’’) and dedication (5 items, e.g., ‘‘To me my work is challenging’’). High scores on vigour and dedication indicated high engagement. All items were scored on a 7-point frequency rating scale ranging from 0 (‘‘never’’) to 6 (‘‘always’’). Extrarole customer service. ERCS was measured by using a scale generated for the study based on the one used by Bettencourt and Brown (1997). Three items were written to refer to discretionary behaviours of contact employees; they refer to non role-prescribed helping behaviours directed towards customers that extend beyond formal requirements, providing spontaneous exceptional service towards the customers during the service encounter. As in previous research efforts (Bettencourt & Brown, 1997; Maxham & Netemeyer, 2003), we employed expressions such as ‘‘surprise’’ and ‘‘beyond what is expected’’ to ensure that we were measuring extrarole behaviours (e.g., ‘‘I help customers with problems beyond what is expected or required’’). All items were scored on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (‘‘completely disagree’’) to 7 (‘‘completely agree’’).

RESULTS Plan of analysis The hypothesized model (fully mediated) and the alternative model (fully direct) were analysed by computing a structural equation model (SEM) using Lisrel 8.30 (Jo¨reskog & So¨rbom, 1993). Maximum likelihood estimation methods were used, and the input for the analysis was the covariance matrix. The data considered in the analyses for the distributive and procedural justice measures are the items, because these two concepts are well validated in the literature as two independent dimensions of

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE, WELL-BEING AT WORK, AND ERCS

337

organizational justice (Colquitt et al., 2001). In contrast, Colquitt and colleagues confirmed that the dimension of interactional justice is composed of two subscales: interpersonal and informational. Congruently, we used these two constructs as indicators of the interactional justice. Similarly, the two components of well-being analysed in this manuscript, burnout and engagement, have two subscales describing each of them: emotional exhaustion and cynicism for the core of burnout, and vigour and dedication for the core of engagement (Schaufeli, Salanova, et al., 2002). Finally, for the extrarole customer service, the inputs for the analyses are the items (see Bettencourt & Brown, 1997; Maxham & Netemeyer, 2003). The goodnessof-fit of the models was evaluated using absolute and relative indices, as no statistical tests or critical values are available to determine the exclusive adequacy of absolute indices (Bentler, 1990). The absolute goodness-of-fit indices computed were: the w2 goodness-of-fit statistic; the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA); the goodness-of-fit index (GFI); and the adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI). The relative goodness-of-fit indices calculated were: the Normed Fit Index (NFI); the Non-Normed Fit Index (NNFI); and the Comparative Fit Index (CFI).

Preliminary results Descriptive statistics and Pearson correlations among the study variables are presented in Table 1. Significant negative and positive correlations existed

TABLE 1 Means, standard deviations, correlations (Pearson), and internal consistency reliabilities of the measured variables Variables 1. Distributive justice 2. Procedural justice 3. Interpersonal justice 4. Informational justice 5. Exhaustion 6. Cynicism 7. Vigour 8. Dedication 9. ERCS

M

SD

3.86 1.81

1

2

3

4

6

7

8

9

(.96)

4.54 1.57 .72**

(.88)

5.88 1.44 .25** .46**

(.86)

5.13 1.60 .44** .64** .75**

(.75)

3.43 1.99 4.99 4.43 5.21

.34** .40** .35** .49** .16**

1.52 1.30 0.86 1.41 1.10

5

.29** .32** .21** .34** .17**

.37** .42** .27** .42** .13**

.27** .33** .26** .34** .09

Values on the diagonal are Cronbach’s alpha. *p 5 .05, **p 5 .01.

(.87) .58** (.87) .34** .40** (.74) .42** .56** .58** (.89) .14* .15** .25** .36** (.80)

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

338

MOLINER ET AL.

between the dimensions of organizational justice and burnout and engagement, respectively. Furthermore, burnout and engagement were negatively related to each other, and they showed statistically significant negative and positive correlations to ERCS, in that order. All of the measures employed in the current study were obtained by means of self-reports. Thus, it is possible that common method variance might inflate the association among the variables. To examine this possibility, we ran the Harman’s Single-Factor test. This test is used for addressing the issue of common method variance (Podsakoff et al., 2003). Based on this technique, we used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) as a more sophisticated test of the hypothesis that a single factor could account for all the variance in the data. This analysis showed an acceptable fit for a six-factor model in which the organizational justice dimensions, burnout, engagement, and ERCS are considered different concepts and, consequently, measured independently (RMSA ¼ .04; CFI ¼ .99; NFI ¼ .96), with all the items loading significantly as expected (p 5 .05).

Structural modelling results Test of overall model. In order to test which of the two hypothesized models (fully direct model vs. fully mediated model) better fits the data, we compared them by using structural equations modelling. The results of the SEM analyses are summarized in Table 2. The analyses indicated that both models had similar indices, with the RMSEA meeting the criterion of .08, and the AGFI, GFI, and relative goodness-of-fit indices (NFI, NNFI, and CFI) satisfying the criterion of .90. Although the fully direct model included five additional paths, the fits of the models were similar, Dw2(5) ¼ 9.05, p 4 .05. Hence, the mediated model obtained a similar fit, while improving parsimony. Despite the similarity in fit indices, Figure 1 shows that neither the direct effects from distributive, procedural, and interactional justice to ERCS nor the direct effect of distributive justice on burnout and engagement were significant. In contrast, the fully mediated model was supported (see Figure 2). In summary, our mediation model was supported, as the fit of the model did not improve with the addition of direct paths. Therefore, the indirect

TABLE 2 Fit statistics for structural models Model Fully direct Fully mediated

w2

df

RMSAE

NFI

NNFI

CFI

GFI

AGFI

137.45 146.50

89 94

.041 .041

.96 .96

.98 .98

.99 .99

.95 .95

.92 .92

339

Figure 1. Fully direct model (added path in dashed lines). Standardized parameter estimates for the hypothesized model. *p 5 .05, **p 5 .01. Percentage of explained variance for each variable in brackets.

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

340

Figure 2. Fully mediated model (solid lines). Standardized parameter estimates for the hypothesized model. *p 5 .05, **p 5 .01. Percentage of explained variance for each variable in brackets.

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE, WELL-BEING AT WORK, AND ERCS

341

relationship of distributive justice to well-being at work, and the mediating role of well-being at work (engagement) in the relationship between organizational justice and ERCS, were sustained. Test of hypotheses. Examination of the path coefficients in Figure 2 provides more direct tests of our eight predictions. For simplicity, we will move from the right to the left of the figure. The first two predictions anticipated that burnout would be negatively related to ERCS (Hypothesis 1), while engagement would be positively related (Hypothesis 2). Interestingly, and despite previous research, Hypothesis 1 was not confirmed, as the path from burnout to ERCS was nonsignificant. More favourably, engagement, as indicated by vigour and dedication, was strongly related to ERCS (.59, p 5 .01). Our model attempts to integrate the literature on well-being with that of justice. Consequently, we propose that burnout and engagement are mediators. Procedural justice should have significant paths to burnout (Hypothesis 3) and engagement (Hypothesis 4). Likewise, interactional justice should also be associated with burnout (Hypothesis 5) and engagement (Hypothesis 6). As shown in Figure 2, all four of these paths were significant. They were also in the correct direction, as more procedural and interactional justice caused less burnout (7.47 and 7.23, respectively) and more employee engagement (.27 and .35, respectively). Finally, our last two hypotheses test Skitka et al.’s (2003) causal model of distributive justice. Figure 2 displays support for Skitka and colleagues’ theory. In support of Hypothesis 7, the path from distributive justice to procedural justice is large and significant (.79, p 5 .01). In support of Hypothesis 8, which tested our extension of the Skitka et al. framework, the path from distributive justice to interactional justice was also large and significant (.45, p 5 .01).

DISCUSSION The purpose of the present study was to examine a model joining organizational justice and well-being at work to explain ERCS. Our model proposed that well-being at work (measured as burnout/engagement) mediated the relationship between organizational justice and ERCS. With this in mind, the present study made two primary theoretical contributions. First, by differentiating the role played by the different dimensions of organizational justice, we provide additional support for the differentiation of these dimensions. Second, our study was the first to examine a mediator of the organizational justice and ERCS relationship: well-being at work. Most of the study hypotheses were confirmed. Consistent with previous studies, the results showed significant correlations between organizational

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

342

MOLINER ET AL.

justice and ERCS (see Table 1) (Bettencourt & Brown, 1997; Maxham & Netemeyer, 2003). Besides, we developed the model by including two potentially mediating constructs, burnout and engagement. The results supported our contention that procedural justice and interactional justice explained well-being at work (burnout/engagement) and only indirectly affected the performance of ERCS. Specifically, the positive side of wellbeing at work, engagement, was a significant mediator. These results confirm the differential relationship between organizational justice and well-being at work, as has been indicated in other studies conducted in other contexts (Brotheridge, 2003; Judge & Colquitt, 2004). Procedural and interactional justices are direct precursors of well-being at work, mediating the relationships between distributive justice and worker well-being. It is generally assumed that the more outcome-oriented dimension of justice (distributive) and the more relationship-oriented dimensions of justice (procedural and interactional) tend to play different roles in explaining outcome variables. Accordingly, research efforts should articulate the differential roles of the justice dimensions accurately (Cropanzano et al., 2001). Previous research also considers that the more interpretable the dimension of justice is, the higher the effects it would have. In this sense, and contrary to procedural and interactional justice, distributive justice needs information on the outcomes of others in order to be judged (van den Bos, Lind, Vermunt, & Wilke, 1997). We expect that if a person does not receive fair outcomes in return for his/her investment, other perceptions of justice will tend to become more negative. And as expected, the direct effects from distributive justice to well-being were nonsignificant. The present findings are also consistent with the differentiation between burnout and engagement (Maslach et al., 2001). The critical role played by the dimension of engagement in the prediction of ERCS emphasizes that a differentiation between the positive and negative sides is needed to better understand the role played by well-being at work. While more research is needed, the concept of engagement seems promising. Well-being at work is a broad concept within psychological literature, covering mood and emotion variations, as well as major mental health states. The role of engagement in our study reveals that well-being at work cannot be restricted to negative responses. Well-being at work is not synonymous with an absence of problems. The consideration of engagement could improve the conceptualization of well-being, reinforcing other positively oriented constructs such as job satisfaction. While documenting the role of engagement in promoting ERCS was one contribution of this study, we were unable to find evidence of a strong negative relationship between burnout and ERCS. This lack of support for Hypothesis 1 was surprising to us, given that previous research has found a relationship between exhaustion and OCB (Cropanzano et al., 2003).

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE, WELL-BEING AT WORK, AND ERCS

343

Therefore, we are reluctant to interpret this null finding by inferring that no association exists between burnout and OCB. It does seem likely that the relationship between these two variables is more complicated than we had analysed. These nonsupportive findings might be interpretable if we look more closely at the nature of burnout. Our present model assumes that individuals who are experiencing burnout might be unwilling or unable to exert additional effort. However, it is also possible that these individuals may work harder in the hopes of repairing the problem. If this is the case, then an aggrieved individual, even one aggrieved to the point of burnout, who engaged in loyalty, might even work harder, thereby showing improvements in customer service. Of course, if roughly the same number of workers responded with additional effort as the number who responded with disengagement, when these two sets of employees were aggregated together, the relationship between burnout and ERCS would be modest. These ideas about why burnout had no effect in our study are speculative, but this topic would be an interesting one for future research. In summary, engagement and burnout behave differently in relationship to ERCS.

Practical implications Pending future research, the ideas raised by this study may well have practical implications. Effective management of the service encounter, understood as the dyadic interaction between a customer and service provider, involves understanding the complex behaviour of contact employees. Although there are other predictors of well-being at work (Leiter & Maslach, 2004), such us safety (May, Gilson, & Harter, 2004) and customer aggression (Grandey, Dickter, & Sin, 2004), our results indicate that procedural and interactional justices are important antecedents of burnout and engagement. Organizations wishing to increase ERCS behaviours could undertake human resources techniques to promote the employee’s well-being. Thus, it may lead managers to be aware that the creation of fair procedures in organizations serves to increase employee wellbeing. Furthermore, supervisors can be empowered to treat employees appropriately. Specific training and job descriptions may help to deliver excellent interpersonal treatment to contact employees. In addition, burnout may be a critical facet of worker well-being in understanding quality of work life, but it alone is not sufficient to generate ERCS. To perform ERCS, there is a need to encourage the levels of engagement in contact employees.

Limitations and suggestions for future research Overall, the findings obtained here were consistent with our theoretical model and extended previous theory. Nevertheless, as is true for all studies,

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

344

MOLINER ET AL.

the present one has some limitations that should be noted. It is noteworthy that all of our measures were obtained via self-report. This creates the possibility that common method variance (CMV) may inflate the relationships obtained here (Podsakoff et al., 2000). Fortunately, there are two important features of our data that argue against CMV as an exclusive explanation for our findings. First, if CMV were all that was operating, then one would expect to find that a large single factor best explained the structure of our measures (Podsakoff et al., 2003). As we discussed earlier, this was not the case. Our CFA results were consistent with a priori theory, and not with a single-factor model. Second, a strong CMV explanation would suggest that all of the variables were almost equally related. As shown in our structural model, as well as in our correlation matrix, this was not the case. Instead, the correlations among the predictors tended to vary a great deal. If CMV were the only explanation, our results would have been less supportive than they actually were. However, the possibility remains that our findings are theoretically valid, but that they were somewhat inflated by self-report bias. Such a possibility does not render our proposed model untenable, but it does caution us that the model might actually account for somewhat less variance than these current findings suggest. Clearly, this is a matter for future research. While our study is a promising beginning, additional research should be conducted with non-self-report measures. Another limitation is the cross-sectional nature of our data. In this study, all of our measures were taken at the same point in time. While our structural model was highly consistent with our relationship expectations, alternative models cannot be specifically ruled out by these data (James, Mulaik, & Brett, 1982). Clearly, future explorations of our model could benefit from the use of longitudinal designs. Such studies would allow for much stronger inferences than can be made from the current cross-sectional approach. In addition, the present study is only focused on hotels, and replications in other service contexts will increase generalizability. However, hotels share characteristics with other service organizations (e.g., direct contact between customers and employees), and it is reasonable to anticipate similar results in other types of service. Having said this, it is worth emphasizing that a close look at the available research places our present relationship framework on generally strong ground. Recall that two of the key relationships in our model were from justice to burnout and from burnout to ERCS. There is longitudinal evidence available that is consistent with each of these hypotheses. For example, one longitudinal study by van Dierendonck, Schaufeli, and Buunk (2001) found that inequity (a type of distributive justice) was related to burnout when measured at a later date. Likewise, a longitudinal study of 3373 employees by Kivima¨ki, Elovainio, Vahtera, and Ferrie (2002) found that procedural justice perceptions predicted reports of physical health,

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE, WELL-BEING AT WORK, AND ERCS

345

mental health symptoms, and absenteeism. A similar case can be made for the association between burnout and ERCS. While we were unable to locate any longitudinal studies assessing the relationship between burnout and extrarole customer service, longitudinal evidence is available showing that burnout predicts related constructs, such as job performance (Wright & Bonett, 1997). Given previous work of this kind, it seems likely that the relationships suggested here provide a reasonable first step in understanding the impact of fairness on ERCS. The ERCS concept needs more elaboration in the future. It could present overlap with other concepts (e.g., self-esteem). Different indicators of ERCS could be considered (e.g., time invested in the attention to customer) to reduce this overlap. Also, other sources of data (e.g., customers) could be considered to better distinguish between ERCS and other employee variables. Despite these limitations and the need for additional research, the present study has provided an initial investigation of an important process: Workplace justice seems to promote higher engagement and lower burnout; this better mental health, specifically high levels of engagement, in turn produces positive ERCS that benefits the customers. Therefore, well-being of employees is in the best interest of organizations. The ability to promote well-being by treating employees with justice is of considerable benefit not only to workers (though this would seem reason enough); it also benefits customers and even organizations themselves. With these considerations in mind, as well as others, workplaces can be productive precisely because they are also high quality places to work.

REFERENCES Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267 – 299). New York: Academic Press. Ang, S., van Dyne, L., & Begley, T. M. (2003). The employment relationships of foreign workers versus local employees: A field study of organizational justice, job satisfaction, and OCB. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 561 – 583. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238 – 246. Ben-Zur, H., & Yagil, D. (2005). The relationship between empowerment, aggressive behaviours of customers, coping, and burnout. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 14, 81 – 99. Bettencourt, L. A., & Brown, S. W. (1997). Contact employees: Relationships among workplace fairness, job satisfaction and prosocial service behaviors. Journal of Retailing, 73, 39 – 61. Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. S. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. Research on Negotiation in Organizations, 1, 43 – 55. Brotheridge, C. M. (2003). The role of fairness in mediating the effects of voice and justification on stress and other outcomes in a climate or organizational change. International Journal of Stress Management, 10, 253 – 268.

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

346

MOLINER ET AL.

Clemmer, E. C. (1993). An investigation into the relationship of fairness and customer satisfaction with services. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: Approaching fairness in human resources management (pp. 193 – 207). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P. E. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: A metaanalysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, 278 – 321. Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 386 – 400. Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L., & Yee, K. Y. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 425 – 445. Cropanzano, R., Goldman, B., & Benson, L. (2005). Organizational justice. In J. Barling, K. Kelloway, & M. Frone (Eds.), Handbook of work stress (pp. 63 – 87). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Cropanzano, R., Rupp, D. E., & Byrne, Z. S. (2003). The relationship of exhaustion to work attitudes, job performance and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 160 – 169. Cropanzano, R., Rupp, D. E., Mohler, C. J., & Schminke, M. (2001). Three roads to organizational justice. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 20, 1 – 113. Dormann, C., & Kaiser, D. (2002). Job conditions and customer satisfaction. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 11, 257 – 283. Elovainio, M., Kivima¨ki, M., & Helkama, K. (2001). Organizational justice evaluations, job control, and occupational strain. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 418 – 424. Gonza´lez-Roma´, V., Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Lloret, S. (2006). Burnout and work engagement: Independent factors or opposite poles? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68, 165 – 174. Grandey, A., Dickter, D., & Sin, H.-P. (2004). The customer is not always right: Customer verbal aggression toward service employees. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 397 – 418. Green, D. E., Walkey, F. H., & Taylor, A. J. W. (1991). The three-factor structure of the Maslach Burnout Inventory. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6, 453 – 472. Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational justice: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. Journal of Management, 16, 399 – 432. Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Keyes, C. L. M. (2003). Well-being in the workplace and its relationship to business outcomes: A review of the Gallup studies. In C. L. M. Keyes & J. Haidt (Eds.), Flourishing positive psychology and the life well-lived (pp. 205 – 224). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. James, L. R., Mulaik, S. A., & Brett, J. M. (1982). Causal analysis: Assumptions, models, and data. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Jo¨reskog, K. G., & So¨rbom, D. (1993). Lisrel-8. Chicago: Scientific Software. Judge, T. A., & Colquitt, J. (2004). Organizational justice and stress: The mediating role of work-family conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 395 – 404. Kausto, J., Elo, A.-L., Lipponen, J., & Elovainio, M. (2005). Moderating effects of job insecurity in the relationships of procedural justice and employee well-being: Gender differences. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 13, 431 – 452. Kivima¨ki, M., Elovainio, M., Vahtera, J., & Ferrie, J. E. (2002). Organisational justice and health of employees: Prospective cohort study. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 60, 27 – 34. Kop, N., Euwema, M., & Schaufeli, W. (1999). Burnout, job stress and violent behaviour among Dutch police officers. Work and Stress, 13, 326 – 340. Leiter, M. P., Harvie, P., & Frizell, C. (1998). The correspondence of patient satisfaction and nurse burnout. Social Science and Medicine, 47, 1611 – 1617.

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE, WELL-BEING AT WORK, AND ERCS

347

Leiter, M., & Maslach, C. (2004). Areas of worklife: A structured approach to organizational predictors of burnout. In P. A. Perrewe´ & D. C. Ganster (Eds.), Research in occupational stress and well-being: Vol. 3. Emotional and physiological processes and positive intervention strategies (pp. 135 – 164). Amsterdam: Elsevier. Leventhal, G. S. (1976). The distribution of rewards and resources in groups and organizations. In L. Berkowitz & W. Walster (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 9, pp. 91 – 131). New York: Academy Press. Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? New approaches and organizations. In K. Gergen, M. Greenberg, & R. Willis (Eds.), Social exchange advances in theory and research (pp. 27 – 55). New York: Plenum. Maslach, C. (2003). Job burnout: New directions in research and intervention. American Psychological Society, 12, 189 – 192. Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1981). The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 2, 99 – 113. Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1986). MBI: Maslach Burnout Inventory; manual research edition. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (1997). The truth about burnout: How organizations cause persons stress and what to do about it. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Maslach, C., & Schaufeli, W. B. (1993). Historical and conceptual development of burnout. In W. B. Schaufeli, C. Maslach, & T. Marek (Eds.), Professional burnout: Recent developments in theory and research (pp. 1 – 16). New York: Taylor & Francis. Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397 – 422. Masterson, S. S. (2001). A trickle-down model of organizational justice: Relating employees’ and customers’ perceptions of and reactions to fairness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 594 – 604. Masterson, S. S., Lewis, K., Goldman, B. M., & Taylor, M. S. (2000). Integrating justice and social exchange: The differing effects of fair procedures and treatment on work relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 738 – 748. Maxham, J. G., III, & Netemeyer, R. G. (2003). Firms reap what they show: The effects of shared values and perceived organizational justice on customers’ evaluations of complaint handling. Journal of Marketing, 67, 46 – 62. May, D. R., Gilson, R. L., & Harter, L. M. (2004). The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 11 – 37. Moorman, R. H. (1991). Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 845 – 855. Motowidlo, S. J. (2003). Job performance. In W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen, & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Vol. 12. Industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 39 – 53). New York: Wiley. Myers, D. G., & Diener, E. (1995). Who is happy? Psychological Science, 6, 10 – 19. Podsakoff, P. M., McKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method bias in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879 – 903. Podsakoff, P. M., McKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behavior: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26, 513 – 563. Rupp, D. E., & Cropanzano, R. (2002). The mediating effects of social exchange relationships in predicting workplace outcomes from multiforce organizational justice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89, 925 – 946.

Downloaded By: [Universidad de Valencia] At: 17:51 17 July 2008

348

MOLINER ET AL.

Schaufeli, W. B., Leiter, M. P., Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1996). Maslach burnout inventory—General survey. In C. Maslach, S. E. Jackson, & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), The Maslach burnout inventory—Test manual (3rd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Schaufeli, W. B., Martı´ nez, I. M., Marques-Pinto, A., Salanova, M., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). Burnout and engagement in university students: A cross-national study. Journal of CrossCultural Psychology, 33, 464 – 481. Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., Gonza´lez-Roma´, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71 – 92. Schminke, M., Ambrose, M. L., & Cropanzano, R. (2000). The effect of organizational structure on perceptions of procedural fairness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 294 – 304. Schneider, B., & Bowen, D. E. (1992). Personnel/human resources management in the service sector. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 10, 1 – 30. Schneider, B., Schneider, B., Ehrhart, M. G., Mayer, D. M., Saltz, J. L., & Niles-Jolly, K. (2005). Understanding organization-customer links in service settings. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 1017 – 1032. Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikzentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. The American Psychologist, 55, 5 – 14. Shirom, A. (2003). Job-related burnout: A review. In J. C. Quick & L. Tetrick (Eds.), Handbook of occupational health psychology (pp. 245 – 264). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Shirom, A. (2004). Feeling vigorous at work? The construct of vigor and the study of positive affect in organizations. In P. A. Perrewe´ & D. C. Ganster (Eds.), Research in occupational stress and well-being: Vol. 3. Emotional and physiological processes and positive intervention strategies (pp. 135 – 164). Amsterdam: Elsevier. Skarlicki, D. P., & Latham, G. P. (1996). Increasing citizenship behavior within labor union: A test of organizational justice theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2, 161 – 169. Skitka, L. J., Winquist, J., & Hutchinson, S. (2003). Are outcome fairness and outcome favorability distinguishable psychological constructs? A meta-analytic review. Social Justice Research, 16, 309 – 341. Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Van den Bos, K., Lind, E. A., Vermunt, R., & Wilke, H. A. M. (1997). How do I judge my outcome when I do not know the outcome of others?: The psychology of the fair process effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1034 – 1046. Van Dierendonck, D., Schaufeli, W. B., & Buunk, B. P. (2001). Burnout and inequity among human service professionals: A longitudinal study. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 43 – 52. Van Dierendonck, D., Schaufeli, W. B., & Sixma, H. (1994). Burnout among general practitioners: A perspective from equity theory. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 13, 86 – 100. Van Horn, J. E., Schaufeli, W. B., & Enzmann, D. (1999). Teacher burnout and lack of reciprocity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 91 – 108. Wright, T. A. (2005). The role of ‘‘happiness’’ in organizational research: Past, present and future directions. In P. L. Perrewe & D. C. Ganster (Eds.), Research in occupational stress and well-being. (Vol. 4, pp. 225 – 268). Amsterdam: JAI Press. Wright, T. A., & Bonett, D. G. (1997). The contribution of burnout to work performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 491 – 499. Original manuscript received October 2005 Revised manuscript received February 2007 First published online 12 December 2007